Back
2025 Supreme(Del) 536
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. HARI SHANKAR, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, JJ.
Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
M/S Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery Llp & Anr. – Respondent
FAO(OS) (COMM) 232/2023 & CM APPL. 55117/2023
Decided on : 18-08-2025
Important Points
Subject
Intellectual Property - Trademark Law
Act Referred
TRADE MARKS ACT : S.35, S.7
Headnote
Findings of Court:
The respondents were found to have sincerely used the mark VASUNDHARA since 2001 and had established a legitimate claim under Section 35 as the mark stemmed from the proprietor's own name. The court affirmed the conclusion that the appellant's attempt to assert conflicting statements before the Trademark Registry deprived them of priority for injunctive relief. (Paras 12, 19, 21, 72-74);
Issues: The main questions revolved around the establishment of goodwill, the applicability of Section 35, and the correctness of estoppel due to contradictory assertions before the Trademark Registry. (Paras 37, 60);
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the lack of demonstrated goodwill by the appellant, alongside the established honest use by the respondents, warranted the dismissal of the injunction application, affirming that two parties can generally use similar names if the bona fides of their usage are established. (Paras 58-66, 79);
Result: Appeal dismissed.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Sagar Chandra, Mr. Prateek Kumar, Ms. Aarushi Jain, Mr. Yojit Pareek, Ms. Shubhie Wahi, Ms. Sanya Kapoor, Ms. Ankita, Mr. Prassant Kr. Sharma and Mr. Chetan Charitra, Advs.
For the Respondent: Mr. Shuvasish Sen Gupta, Mr. Kumar Vivek Vibhu, Mr. Pawan Maheshwari and Mr. Bhavesh Garodia Advs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case introduction and initial proceedings (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. appellant's factual claims and trademarks (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. respondents' defense and counterarguments (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. court's observations and reasoning (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 34 , 35) |
| 5. application of section 35 in passing off case (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 48 , 54 , 56 , 57) |
| 6. assessment of goodwill in passing off (Para 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 70 , 74 , 75 , 76) |
| 7. conclusion and affirmation of the judgment (Para 79 , 80 , 81 , 82) |
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
1. This appeal assails order dated 19 July 2023 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in IA 4154/2022 in CS (COMM) 161/2022, Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. v Vasundhara Fashion Jewelery LLP & Anr
2. The appellant is the plaintiff, and the respondents are the defendants in the suit, which is presently pending before the learned Single Judge.
3. In the suit, the appellant has sought a decree of permanent injunction, restraining the respondents and all others acting on their behalf from manufacturing, selling, exporting, advertising or in any other manner dealing with jewellery, precious stones, gems and any other allied or cognate goods or services under the marks and domain names VASUNDHARA JEWELLERS, VASUNDHRA, 
or 
, the domain name www.vasundhara.in or any other mark, label or domain name which is identical or deceptively similar to the appellant’s marks VASUNDHRA, VASUNDHRA JEWELLERS, 
or VASUNDHRA.
4. The suit was accompanied by IA 4154/2022, preferred under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, whereby the appellant prayed that, pending disposal of the suit, the respondents be injuncted from using the aforenoted marks VASUNDHARA JEWELLERS, VASUNDHRA, 
or 
for jewellery, precious stones, gems or any other allied or cognate goods.
5. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has dismissed IA 4154/2022. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant has filed the present appeal.
Rival Pleadings
Appellant’s submissions in the suit
6. The appellant was established on 28 October 1999 as Vasundhra Jewellers Private Limited. Since then, the appellant claimed to have been using VASUNDHRA and VASUNDHRA JEWELLERS as its trademarks.
7. The appellant is also the proprietor of the following registered trademarks in Class 14 of the Nice classification of trademarks, which has been incorporated in Section 7 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 :
| Trade Mark | Date of Application | User | Class | Specification of Goods and Services |
 | 23 May 2023 | 1 January 1999 | 14 | Jewellery in Precious Metal and Gems. |
 | 22 May 2019 | 28 October 1999 | 14 | Precious metals or coated therewith jewellery including imitation jewellery and precious stones. All being goods included in class 14. |
 | 19 December 2017 | 17 October 2016 | 14 | Precious metals or coated therewith jewellery including imitation jewellery and precious stones. All being goods included in class 14. |
8. Since 26 June 2011, the appellant also claims to be the owner of the domain name www.vasundhrajewellers.com and other similar domain names.
9. The appellant also claims the following turnover of its business, which commenced in 1999-20:
| Year | Sale proceeds |
| 1999-2000 | ₹ 19,80,812/- |
| 2000-2001 | ₹ 2,81,80,175/- |
| 2001-2002 | ₹ 1,97,26,465/- |
| 2002-2003 | ₹ 3,69,36,170/- |
| 2016-2017 | ₹ 44,82,31,111/- |
| 2017-2018 | ₹ 49,36,14,187/- |
10. The appellant had also placed on record its advertisement and promotional expenses incurred by it for the years 1999-2000 till 2021- 2022. Of these, the figures for the years 1999-2000 till 2008-2009 may be extracted thus as provided in the plaint:
| Financial Year | Promotional Expenses (₹) |
| 1999-2000 | 43,254 |
| 2000-2001 | 92,848 |
| 2001-2002 | 29,200 |
| 2002-2003 | 4,35,419 |
| 2003-2004 | 11,45,489 |
| 2004-2005 | 10,22,808 |
| 2005-2006 | 1,70,175 |
| 2006-2007 | 7,14,114 |
| 2007-2008 | 2,19,120 |
| 2008-2009 | 20,43,629 |
| 2009-2010 | 64,58,243 |
| 2010-2011 | 52,62,228 |
| 2011-2012 | 36,87,717 |
| 2012-2013 | 24,98,755 |
| 2013-2014 | 1,78,010 |
| 2014-2015 | 1,06,166 |
| 2015-2016 | 8,58,860 |
| 2016-2017 | 22,37,105 |
| 2017-2018 | 11,59,521 |
| 2018-2019 | 3,45,759 |
| 2019-2020 | 4,31,212 |
| 20 | |
 |  | |
 |  | |
 |  | |
 |
 |  | |
 |  | |
 |  | |
 |
